[quote]streamline wrote:
Possession is 9/10th of the law.[/quote]
No. If someone steals something they are not entitled to 90% of it.
If there is no way to prove the man in question made the photos is he still guilty of a crime? Or do we just find him 90% guilty for possession as you state?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dwilliams wrote:
If you know that child porn is on your computer then possession of child pornography is a crime in the United States. It isn’t a crime if you are unaware of the images.
I don’t really care about “the law”. I know what a crime is.[/quote]
What? If that’s the case then you’d know it’s ILLEGAL to have kiddie porn pics in your possession.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
dwilliams wrote:
If you know that child porn is on your computer then possession of child pornography is a crime in the United States. It isn’t a crime if you are unaware of the images.
I don’t really care about “the law”. I know what a crime is.
What? If that’s the case then you’d know it’s ILLEGAL to have kiddie porn pics in your possession.[/quote]
Possession of weed is illegal. It is not a crime. Crimes are only committed against persons or their property.
[quote]lixy wrote:
dwilliams wrote:
No deep thinking on the subject is necessary.
These kind of laws are passed based on nothing more than the “won’t somebody please think of the children” emotions.[/quote]
Well, I’m not a lawmaker. But I do believe that a child’s emotions are not the only thing that is considered by people who pass laws.
However, it is an emotional subject and people accused of this kind of crime are often considered guilty before proven innocent, which sucks. The person who brought in the computer isn’t necessarily the person who collected the porn and deserves a fair investigation and trial if necessary.
Tiribulus, I think you did the right thing.
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Tiribulus, I think you did the right thing. [/quote]
Definitely.
To just ignore something like this to protect someone’s privacy would have been wrong.
[quote]lixy wrote:
BONEZ217 wrote:
Downloading the files enables the child molestors. Supporting (not you, the downloader who was arrested) this kind of thing is just as bad as holding the camera.
How?
I’m all for immolating child molesters in the town-square, but to say that duplicating bits of data “enables the child molestors[sic]” is nonsense. Information wants to be free!
OP, that is a pretty awesome story. I’m curious: What kind of names did the files have? [/quote]
Suffice it to say that they all included “preteen boys” and every sex act imaginable.
As I was checking the progress of copying the “My Documents” folder from the biggest account on the machine over to the Linux box I couldn’t help seeing the file names streaming by.
[quote]elano wrote:
My point was simply that a man possibly innocent of sexual offenses is now a sexual offender.[/quote]
If a grown man gets of on kiddie porn, that’s a sexual offense.
This is a pretty black and white issue, there is no gray area of privacy when dealing with an issue like this.
Tiribulus you 100% did the right thing and I am glad that you had the morals to do so.
You are a true T man and a good person, excellent work.
I think we can all agree that this guy was a suck fuck. Stop trying to make that point. It’s a fact and not the issue being debated.
Whoever asked or assumed that I would ignore 2 kids being molested doesn’t know me. If I saw something like that going on, I would stomp a mud hole in that sick mf. If a child came to me and talked about being molested, I would contact the authorities immediately.
My original point was that if I was a computer technician and I saw some photos labeled “8yo_boy_eats_boy’s_ass.jpg” I wouldn’t have bothered to click on it. I would be like "OOOKKKAAYY what a sick mutherfucker… " but prob not called the cops unless I really thought the guy was harming kids, not just collecting photos.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
lixy wrote:
BONEZ217 wrote:
Downloading the files enables the child molestors. Supporting (not you, the downloader who was arrested) this kind of thing is just as bad as holding the camera.
How?
I’m all for immolating child molesters in the town-square, but to say that duplicating bits of data “enables the child molestors[sic]” is nonsense. Information wants to be free!
OP, that is a pretty awesome story. I’m curious: What kind of names did the files have?
Suffice it to say that they all included “preteen boys” and every sex act imaginable.
As I was checking the progress of copying the “My Documents” folder from the biggest account on the machine over to the Linux box I couldn’t help seeing the file names streaming by.
[/quote]
So he actually had folders of the material? Which makes it obvious that he was STORING the material…which is the deal breaker in violating federal law. And negates all this babbling argument(Lifty) of how he didn’t break any laws.
[quote]elano wrote:
I think we can all agree that this guy was a suck fuck. Stop trying to make that point. It’s a fact and not the issue being debated.
Whoever asked or assumed that I would ignore 2 kids being molested doesn’t know me. If I saw something like that going on, I would stomp a mud hole in that sick mf. If a child came to me and talked about being molested, I would contact the authorities immediately.
My original point was that if I was a computer technician and I saw some photos labeled “8yo_boy_eats_boy’s_ass.jpg” I wouldn’t have bothered to click on it. I would be like "OOOKKKAAYY what a sick mutherfucker… " but prob not called the cops unless I really thought the guy was harming kids, not just collecting photos.[/quote]
So what are the chances that this guy hasn’t harmed any kids. Considering that if he has,then the victims wouldn’t be known until after the fact. Nevertheless,KNOWINGLY possessing child pornography is a crime…there’s no getting around this fact.
[quote]elano wrote:
My original point was that if I was a computer technician and I saw some photos labeled “8yo_boy_eats_boy’s_ass.jpg” I wouldn’t have bothered to click on it. I would be like "OOOKKKAAYY what a sick mutherfucker… " but prob not called the cops unless I really thought the guy was harming kids, not just collecting photos.[/quote]
You have to PURCHASE said photos. Either that, or have an active role in the taking and processing of said photos. You don’t go to childporndaily.net and down load free boy-on-boy desktops.
Try as you might, you are not going to be able to minimize the possession of child-pornography to “just collecting photographs”. It is not a victimless crime.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
You have to PURCHASE said photos. Either that, or have an active role in the taking and processing of said photos. You don’t go to childporndaily.net and down load free boy-on-boy desktops. [/quote]
I’m sure there are numerous torrents and P2P networks where one can download this material free of charge if they want.
If you can download Krystal Steal or Jenna Jameson on Limewire, I’m sure you can find shadier material if you enter the right keywords.
[quote]anonym wrote:
rainjack wrote:
You have to PURCHASE said photos. Either that, or have an active role in the taking and processing of said photos. You don’t go to childporndaily.net and down load free boy-on-boy desktops.
I’m sure there are numerous torrents and P2P networks where one can download this material free of charge if they want.
If you can download Krystal Steal or Jenna Jameson on Limewire, I’m sure you can find shadier material if you enter the right keywords.[/quote]
Jenna Jameson and Krystal Steal are not 8 year-old boys.
What is it about the illegality of child porn do you guys not understand?
Do you want to be the one with child porn on your computer openly sharing it with other pervs? Not saying you are a perv, so don’t think I am. But, that shit is traceable, no?
So even if he was using torrents to DL boy porn, there is a trail one could trace if they get him to talk.
People who enjoy watching children be stripped of their rights deserve no rights of their own.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Jenna Jameson and Krystal Steal are not 8 year-old boys.
What is it about the illegality of child porn do you guys not understand?
Do you want to be the one with child porn on your computer openly sharing it with other pervs? Not saying you are a perv, so don’t think I am. But, that shit is traceable, no?
So even if he was using torrents to DL boy porn, there is a trail one could trace if they get him to talk.
People who enjoy watching children be stripped of their rights deserve no rights of their own. [/quote]
I’m not sure as to how hot a trail would be if they get him to talk - I don’t know whether or not P2P programs record the IP addresses of the content source.
That being said, it would appear to be a “safer” alternative than sending ones credit card information to a website.
As for sharing…with these programs you can download shit from anywhere on the planet. People could be sharing from countries with less strict laws regarding this or with lesser means to track sharers.
I’m just saying that you can’t really argue that this guy was supporting it by either a) paying for it, or b) participating in its creation. Nowadays, you can find pretty much anything over the Internet for free if you are willing to look hard enough.
[quote]anonym wrote:
I’m just saying that you can’t really argue that this guy was supporting it by either a) paying for it, or b) participating in its creation. Nowadays, you can find pretty much anything over the Internet for free if you are willing to look hard enough.[/quote]
That’s why possessing it is a crime, and reporting it when found is not a violation of the perv’s rights. Whether he paid for it or not is irrelevant (IMO) to the fact that he is a willing participant in the violation of the rights of a child.
[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
If a grown man gets of on kiddie porn, that’s a sexual offense.[/quote]
The point some people are trying to make, is that it shouldn’t be.
If you want to deter child abuse, chop off the heads (the big one and/or the little one) of the abusers. Accessing or owning a file shouldn’t be a crime, no matter the content.
[quote]lixy wrote:
CrewPierce wrote:
If a grown man gets of on kiddie porn, that’s a sexual offense.
The point some people are trying to make, is that it shouldn’t be.
If you want to deter child abuse, chop off the heads (the big one and/or the little one) of the abusers. Accessing or owning a file shouldn’t be a crime, no matter the content.[/quote]
I’m glad you don’t live in the same country as I do. It would be a shame if you had any impact on our legal system.
You can find basically whatever you want on the internet. You can even buy illegal drugs on the net. I’m pretty sure most people who have seen kiddy porn on their computer didn’t pay for it or take part in the actual sexual offense.
I’m not saying the guy who owned the PC had his rights violated either. I’m just saying that I wouldn’t have called the cops if I “stumbled” on some nasty photos.
I know that the underground internet has lots of “illegal” files to download. How many people who own pirated versions of WindowsXP or Adobe photoshop actually bootleged them themselves? Probably one in a million. Same thing applies here.
How many bootlegged mp3s do YOU yourself own on YOUR computer? How many hardcore porn videos or pictures do YOU have on your pc? Do you think if a technician saw those videos he would assume you had sex with all those women? Most likely you have not even seen one of them in person.